Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- List of contributors
- Preface
- List of abbreviations
- 1 Global climate governance beyond 2012
- Part I Architecture
- 2 The architecture of global climate governance
- 3 The consequences of a fragmented climate governance architecture
- 4 Environmental effectiveness and economic consequences of fragmented versus universal regimes
- 5 Developing the international carbon market beyond 2012
- 6 The overlap between the UN climate regime and the World Trade Organization
- 7 An architecture for long-term climate change
- 8 Shaping the architecture of future climate governance
- Part II Agency
- Part III Adaptation
- Index
- References
7 - An architecture for long-term climate change
North–South cooperation based on equity and common but differentiated responsibilities
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 05 July 2014
Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- List of contributors
- Preface
- List of abbreviations
- 1 Global climate governance beyond 2012
- Part I Architecture
- 2 The architecture of global climate governance
- 3 The consequences of a fragmented climate governance architecture
- 4 Environmental effectiveness and economic consequences of fragmented versus universal regimes
- 5 Developing the international carbon market beyond 2012
- 6 The overlap between the UN climate regime and the World Trade Organization
- 7 An architecture for long-term climate change
- 8 Shaping the architecture of future climate governance
- Part II Agency
- Part III Adaptation
- Index
- References
Summary
Introduction
The pace of climate negotiations needs to step up significantly to deal with the urgency of the challenge. This chapter considers different proposals or ‘packages’ for a possible architecture for the future of the climate regime beyond 2012. In terms of the appraisal question for Part I of this volume (Biermann et al., this volume, Chapter 2), this chapter analyses proposals that fall between a state of ‘cooperative fragmentation’, namely the status quo of the UN climate regime, and the ideal type of ‘universalism’, that is, an all-encompassing regime. Unlike the contributions by Hof et al. (this volume, Chapter 4) and Flachsland et al. (this volume, Chapter 5), the chief assessment criterion in this chapter is the principle of equity. It is the first principle cited in the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. Article 3.1 states: ‘The parties should protect the climate system for the benefit of present and future generations of humankind, on the basis of equity and in accordance with their common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities’ (UNFCCC 1992).
The objective of the climate convention as spelled out in article 2 is not only about stabilization of concentrations of greenhouse gases. This objective must be achieved in a way that does not prejudice sustainable development. From the perspective of developing countries, ensuring that economic development can proceed in a sustainable manner remains as relevant as ever, as do social considerations and quality of life issues such as food security (UNFCCC 1992).
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Global Climate Governance Beyond 2012Architecture, Agency and Adaptation, pp. 97 - 115Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2010
References
and 1991. Global Warming in an Unequal World: A Case of Environmental Colonialism. New Delhi: Center for Science and Environment.Google Scholar
2002. ‘Equal per capita entitlements: a key to global participation on climate change?’ in , , and (eds.), Building on the Kyoto Protocol: Options for Protecting the Climate. Washington, DC: World Resources Institute, pp. 175–202.Google Scholar
and 2007. Frameworks and Proposals: A Brief, Adequacy and Equity-Based Evaluation of Some Prominent Climate Policy Frameworks and Proposals, Global Issues Papers No. 30. Berlin: Heinrich Böll Stiftung.Google Scholar
, and 2007. The Greenhouse Development Rights Framework: Rationales, Mechanisms, and Initial Calculations. Berkeley, CA: EcoEquity and Christian Aid.Google Scholar
2006. The São Paulo Proposal for an Agreement on Future International Climate Policy. São Paulo: Instituto de Estudos Avancados da Universidade de São Paulo.Google Scholar
, and 2004. International Climate Efforts beyond 2012. Arlington, VA: Pew Center on Global Climate Change.Google Scholar
, , , and 2007. Post-2012 Climate Policy Scenarios, MNP (Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency) Report 500114006/2007. Bilthoven: Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency.Google Scholar
1997. Proposed Elements of a Protocol to the UNFCCC, Presented by Brazil in response to the Berlin Mandate, FCCC/AGBM/1997/Misc.1/Add.3. Bonn: UNFCCC.Google Scholar
2007. A Post-2012 Package: Developing Country Climate Change Strategy, Draft July 16. Washington, DC: Center for Clean Air Policy.Google Scholar
2007. ‘A CER discounting scheme could save climate change regime after 2012’, Climate Policy 7: 171–176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2007. Scenarios for Future International Climate Change Policy, Discussion paper presented at the Midnight Sun Dialogue on Climate Change, Riksgränsen, Sweden, 11–14 June 2007.Google Scholar
and 1998. Building Backstop Technologies and Policies to Implement the Framework Convention on Climate Change. Washington, DC: Pacific Northwest National Laboratory.Google Scholar
and 2005. Sectoral Crediting Mechanisms: An Initial Assessment of Electricity and Aluminium, Doc. No. Com/Env/Epoc/Iea/Slt(2005)8. Paris: Organization for Economic Co-Operation and Development; International Energy Agency.Google Scholar
, , , and 2007. The Triptych Approach Revisited: A Staged Sectoral Approach for Climate Mitigation, MNP Report 500114008/2007. Bilthoven: Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency.Google Scholar
, , , and 2006. ‘Multi-stage: a rule-based evolution of future commitments under the climate change convention’, International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics 6: 1–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, and 2001. ‘Differentiating the burden world-wide: global burden differentiation of GHG emissions reductions based on the triptych approach – a preliminary assessment’, Energy Policy 29: 1007–1030.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and 1999. ‘An effective allocation criterion for CO2 emissions’, Energy Policy 7: 27–36.Google Scholar
, and 2006. Target: Intensity – An Analysis of Greenhouse Gas Intensity Targets. Washington, DC: World Resources Institute.Google Scholar
and 2005. Types of Future Commitments under the UNFCCC and the Kyoto Protocol Post-2012. Gland, Switzerland: World Wide Fund for Nature.Google Scholar
, , , and 2003. Evolution of Commitments under the UNFCCC: Involving Newly Industrialized Economies and Developing Countries. Berlin: Federal Environmental Agency (Umweltbundesamt).Google Scholar
2007. Climate Change 2007: Mitigation. Contribution of Working Group III to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Geneva: IPCC.Google Scholar
, , and 2010 (in press). ‘Governing the European Union: the choices, dilemmas and frameworks of governance’, in , , , and (eds.), Climate Change Policy in the European Union: Confronting the Dilemmas of Mitigation and Adaptation. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and 2002. ‘Reducing uncertainty through dual-intensity targets’, in , , and (eds.), Building on the Kyoto Protocol: Options for Protecting the Climate. Washington, DC: World Resources Institute, pp. 109–134.Google Scholar
and 2008. Financing Adaptation to Climate Change: Issues and Priorities, ECP Report No 8. Brussels: CEPS.Google Scholar
and 2010 (in press). ‘The economics of low stabilisation: implications for technological change and policy’, in and (eds.), Making Climate Change Work for Us: European Perspectives on Adaptation and Mitigation Strategies. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
, and 2002. ‘The Brazilian proposal on relative responsibility for global warming’, in , , and (eds.), Building on the Kyoto Protocol: Options for Protecting the Climate. Washington, DC: World Resources Institute, pp. 157–174.Google Scholar
, and 2010. ‘Climate insurance as part of a post-Kyoto adaptation strategy’, in and (eds.), Making Climate Change Work for Us: European Perspectives on Adaptation and Mitigation Strategies. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, pp. 00–00.Google Scholar
2000. Contraction and Convergence: The Global Solution to Climate Change. Bristol, UK: Green Books and Schumacher Society.Google Scholar
and 2007. The Global Environment Facility: Funding for Adaptation or Adapting to Funds?Stockholm: Stockholm Environment Institute.Google Scholar
1999. Justice in Global Warming Negotiations: How to Obtain a Procedurally Fair Compromise, 2nd revd edn. Oxford, UK: Oxford Institute for Energy Studies.Google Scholar
, , , , , , , , , , , , and 2004. South–North Dialogue on Equity in the Greenhouse: A Proposal for an Adequate and Equitable Global Climate Agreement. Eschborn, Germany: Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit.Google Scholar
2002. Fixed Targets versus More Flexible Architecture, Revised draft note, OECD/International Energy Agency project for the Annex I Expert Group on the UNFCCC. Paris: Organization for Economic Co-Operation and Development; International Energy Agency.Google Scholar
and 2001. ‘The present, past, and future contributions to global warming of CO2 emissions from fuels: a key for negotiation in the climate convention’, Climatic Change 48: 289–308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2006. Sustainable Development Policies and Measures: A Strategic Approach for Enhancing the Climate Regime Post-2012, Presented at the 2nd Workshop of the Dialogue on Long-Term Cooperative Action to Address Climate Change by Enhancing Implementation of the Convention, Nairobi, Kenya, 15–16 November. Pretoria: Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism.Google Scholar
and 2002. ‘Evolving to a sector-based Clean Development Mechanism’, in , , and (eds.), Building on the Kyoto Protocol: Options for Protecting the Climate. Washington, DC: World Resources Institute, pp. 89–108.Google Scholar
2007. Keynote address by the South African Minister of Environmental Affairs and Tourism at the G8+5 Environment Ministerial. Potsdam, Germany.Google Scholar
, , and 2006. Sector-Based Approach to the Post-2012 Climate Change Policy Architecture. Washington, DC: Center for Clean Air Policy.Google Scholar
and 2006. ‘Enhancing the Clean Development Mechanism through sectoral approaches: definitions, applications and ways forward’, International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics 6: 271–287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and 2004. Converging Markets, Paper under the Post-2012 Policy Scenarios Project of FNI (Fridtjof Nansen Institute), CRIEPI (Central Research Institute of Electric Power Industry), HWWA (Hamburg Institute of International Economics) and CASS (Chinese Academy of Social Sciences). Polhøgda: Fridtjof Nansen Institute.Google Scholar
1992. United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. New York: United Nations.Google Scholar
1997. Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. Bonn: UNFCCC Secretariat.Google Scholar
, and 2005. ‘A Madisonian approach to climate policy’, Science 309: 1820–1821.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
2006. Climate Policy Solutions: A Sectoral Approach. Wellington, NZ: Global Climate Change Consultancy.Google Scholar
2007. Testimony of Dr. Harlan L. Watson, Special Climate Negotiator and Special Representative, U.S. Department of State, before the Committee on Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on Asia, the Pacific, and the Global Environment, United States House of Representatives, Hearing on ‘The Kyoto Protocol: an Update’, 11 July 2007. Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office.
and 2007. ‘Building bridges to 2020 and beyond: the road from Bali’, Climate Policy 7: 240–254.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, and 2006. ‘Future mitigation commitments: differentiating among non-Annex I countries’, Climate Policy 5: 469–486.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, and 2007. ‘Sustainable development policies and measures: institutional issues and electrical efficiency in South Africa’, Climate Policy 7: 212–229.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , and 2002. ‘Sustainable development policies and measures: starting from development to tackle climate change’, in , , and (eds.), Building on the Kyoto Protocol: Options for Protecting the Climate. Washington, DC: World Resources Institute, pp. 61–87.Google Scholar
2007. Protecting the Global Climate: ‘Shared Vision – Differentiated Future’, Presentation by Michael Zammit Cutajar, Ambassador for Climate Change, Malta, to the Midnight Sun Dialogue on Climate Change, 11–14 June 2007. Riksgränsen, Sweden.Google Scholar
- 4
- Cited by